Written Discourse Analysis (WDA)
1 like1,204 views
This document contains a summary of written discourse analyses from various online platforms including Path, BBM, Facebook, WhatsApp. It analyzes conversations and posts in terms of gender, age, intentions of participants, linguistic aspects, and cultural differences. For example, it analyzes a Facebook post about a Japanese band and the varied responses from people of different ages and backgrounds. It also analyzes language use, punctuation, abbreviations in WhatsApp and BBM conversations between college students. The document demonstrates techniques for analyzing online written discourse.
Written Discourse Analysis (WDA)
- 1. Written Discourse Analysis (WDA) Group 2: 1. Ambar Nurul Ansari 2. Dwi Firli Ashari 3. Nurul Noviana 4. Widya Laksmawati 5. Yulia Sari Riyanti
- 2. Outline Presentation Example of written discourse and analysis from: 1. Path 2. BBM 3. Facebook 4. WhatsApp (WA)
- 4. Written discourse: Analysis • From the screenshots above, there is different perspective within the quote and the person. The quote includes the Mathematics thing and the person cannot understand even I have explained what it is meant by the quote. It is because the prior knowledge of the person is different with Mathematic thing and also her interests. She is an English teacher from Global Prestasi School and she does not like Mathematics. Therefore, although the quote is quite funny, she still cannot understand what it intends to or refer to.
- 6. Written discourse: Analysis • The second one is the conversation on BBM. I posted a private message which was “Bete banget sama anak priuk”. I wish the respond was like asking why or something related with the private message. But then, I got the different respond which was “Walahh.. Piye kbrmu mbar?” It was really far from the respond that I wanted. Maybe, it is because of the different culture. She has not been to Jakarta and of course she does not know Priuk. And the second possibility is she does not know who the person that I mean is. That is why those things happened.
- 8. Written discourse: Analysis 1. Comment #1 (respondent) • Gender: female • Age: is about 22 y.o • Status: alumnus • Intension: giving tips based on her experience + giving another news for capacity development 2. Comment #2 (respondent) • Gender: male • Age: is about 18-19 y.o • Status: freshman • Intension: giving criteria based on his personal opinion toward the question
- 9. Written discourse: Analysis 3. Comment #3 (respondent) • Gender: male • Age: is about 20 y.o • Status: third-year college students • Intension: sarcasm to me (it’s because I am writing my capstone and is about to graduate next year)
- 10. Written discourse: Facebook The GazettE here means a name of Japanese Visual Kei band that most of Indonesian young generations who love Japanese culture familiar with. (And everybody is STILL waiting for them to come to Indonesia. )
- 11. Written discourse: Responses toward status posted
- 12. Written discourse: Analysis #1st respond • Interlocutor: he does not much follow the news about Japanese pop culture • He believes the information. • Stereotype of men: straight-forward
- 13. Written discourse: Analysis #2nd respond • Level of shock: overload
- 14. Written discourse: Analysis #3rd respond • Doubt, surprised
- 15. Written discourse: Analysis #4th & 5th responds • Surprised, expecting confirmation • Interjection: “eh?” Japanese • Surprised, doubt • Interjection: “hee?” Japanese
- 16. Written discourse: Analysis #6th respond • Expecting confirmation • Believes the information • Request
- 18. Written discourse: Analysis • People who give response on my status stated that they agree with me. I think, maybe all of them have the same feeling which is not stupid though they are slow learner. Some of them even clearly stated that they are not stupid. In my opinion, they have confidence and aware of their own capability. Some of them also put exclamation sign on their respond, and I think it implies that they strongly agree with my status even more than the other.
- 19. Written discourse: BBM Gender: Female and Male Age: 23-24 years old Status: College student Intension: Related to the conversation topic The conversation is linguistically correct in using punctuation, capitalization, cohesion for each sentences. In other point of view, this man tends to use exaggerating sentences which is usually used for woman.
- 20. Written discourse: WA Gender: Female and female Age: 21-23 years old Status: College student Intension: Related to the conversation topic Linguistically analyzed: • She did not use correct punctuation • Many abbreviations • Slank language • Interjections: ceilaaah, ish, yowes • Use cohesion The conversation used many metaphors to express a feeling or thought. The metaphors can be ambiguous as positive or negative meaning.
- 21. THANK YOU